Background
Kamel Elburki appealed after pleading guilty to drug and money laundering offenses pursuant to a plea agreement containing an appeal waiver. His counsel moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California arguing the sentence was substantively unreasonable. Elburki also filed a pro se brief challenging the voluntariness of his plea.
The court’s reasoning
The court concluded that the appeal waiver is valid, enforceable, and applicable to Elburki’s sentencing challenge. The court noted that to the extent Elburki wished to withdraw his guilty plea, he could not obtain relief because he did not move to withdraw his plea below. After independently reviewing the record under Penson v. Ohio, the court found no non-frivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver.
What it means going forward
The dismissal prevents the appellate court from reviewing the substantive reasonableness of the sentence or the voluntariness of the plea due to the enforceable appeal waiver.